Chap. XIII.—Of the Immortality of the Soul, and of Wisdom, Philosophy, and Eloquence.

The subject seems to require in this place, that since we have taught that immortality is the chief good, we should prove
this also, that the soul is immortal. On which subject there is great disputation among philosophers; nor have they who held
true opinions respecting the soul been able to explain or prove anything: for, being destitute of divine knowledge, they neither
brought forward true arguments by which they might overcome, nor evidence by which they might convince. But we shall treat
of this question more conveniently in the last book, when we shall have to discuss the subject of a happy life. There remains
that third part of philosophy, which they call Logic, in which the whole subject of dialectics and the whole method of speaking
are contained. Divine learning does not stand in need of this, because the seat of wisdom is not the tongue, but the heart;
and it makes no difference what kind of language you employ, for the question is not about words,408408 There is a memorable story related by ecclesiastical historians, about a very clever disputant, whose sophistries could not
be answered by his fellow-disputants, but who was completely silenced by the simple answers of a Christian otherwise unknown.
When questioned about his sudden silence, the sophist replied that others exchanged words for words, but that this simple
Christian fought with virtue. but facts. And we are not disputing about the grammarian or the orator, whose knowledge is concerned with the proper manner
of speaking, but about the wise man, whose learning is concerned with the right manner of living. But if that system of natural
philosophy before mentioned is not necessary, nor this of logic, because they are not able to render a man happy, it remains
that the whole force of philosophy is contained in the ethical part alone, to which Socrates is said to have applied himself, laying aside the others. And since I have shown that philosophers erred in this part also,
who did not grasp the chief good, for the sake of gaining which we are born; it appears that philosophy is altogether false
and empty, since it does not prepare us for the duties of justice, nor strengthen the obligations and settled course of man’s
life. Let them know, therefore, that they are in error who imagine that philosophy is wisdom; let them not be drawn away by
the authority of any one; but rather let them incline to the truth, and approach it. There is no room for rashness here; we
must endure the punishment of our folly to all eternity, if we shall be deceived either by an empty character or a false opinion.
But man,409409 There seems to be a reference to a passage of Terence, in which the poet represents it as the property of man to err. [Or
to Cicero, rather: Cujusvis hominis est errare, etc. Philipp. xii. 2.] such as he is, if he trusts in himself, that is, if he trusts in man, is (not to say foolish, in that he does not see his
own error) undoubtedly arrogant, in venturing to claim for himself that which the condition of man does not admit of.

And how much that greatest author of the Roman language is deceived, we may see from that sentiment of his; for when, in his
“Books on Offices,”410410Cicero, De Officiis, ii. 2. he had said that philosophy is nothing else than the desire of wisdom, and that wisdom itself is the knowledge of things
divine and human, added: “And if any one censures the desire of this, I do not indeed understand what there is which he imagines
praiseworthy. For if enjoyment of the mind and rest from cares is sought, what enjoyment can be compared with the pursuits
of those who are always inquiring into something which has reference to and tends to promote a good and happy life? Or if
any account is taken of consistency and virtue, either this is the study411411Ars denotes study, method, or system. The word is applied both to theoretical knowledge and practical skill. by which we may attain them, or there is none at all. To say that there is no system in connection with the greatest subjects,
when none of the least is without a system, is the part of men speaking inconsiderately, and erring in the greatest subjects.
But if there is any discipline of virtue, where shall it be sought when you have departed from that kind of learning?” For
my own part, although I endeavoured to attain in some degree to the means of acquiring learning, on account of my desire to
teach others, yet I have never been eloquent, inasmuch as I never even engaged in 82public speaking; but the goodness of the cause cannot fail of itself to make me eloquent, and for its clear and copious defence
the knowledge of divinity and the truth itself are sufficient. I could wish, therefore, that Cicero might for a short time rise from the dead, that a man of such consummate eloquence might be taught by an insignificant person
who is devoid of eloquence, first, what that is which is deemed worthy of praise by him who blames that study which is called
philosophy; and in the next place, that it is not that study by which virtue and justice are learned, nor any other, as he
thought; and lastly, that since there is a discipline of virtue, he might be taught where it is to be sought, when you have
laid aside that kind of learning, which he did not seek for the sake of hearing and learning. For from whom could he hear
when no one knew it? But, as his usual practice was in pleading causes, he wished to press his opponent by questioning, and thus to lead him to confession, as though he were confident that no answer could be given to show that
philosophy was not the instructress of virtue. And in the Tusculan disputations he openly professed this, turning his speech
to philosophy, as though he was showing himself off by a declamatory style of speaking. “O philosophy, thou guide of life,”
he says; “O thou investigator of virtue, and expeller of vices; what could not only we, but the life of men, have effected
at all without thee? Thou hast been the inventor of laws, thou the teacher of morals and discipline;”—as though, indeed, she
could perceive anything by herself, and he were not rather to be praised who gave her. In the same manner he might have given
thanks to food and drink, because without these life could not exist; yet these, while they minister to sense, confer no benefit.
But as these things are the nourishment of the body, so wisdom is of the soul.

408 There is a memorable story related by ecclesiastical historians, about a very clever disputant, whose sophistries could not
be answered by his fellow-disputants, but who was completely silenced by the simple answers of a Christian otherwise unknown.
When questioned about his sudden silence, the sophist replied that others exchanged words for words, but that this simple
Christian fought with virtue.

409 There seems to be a reference to a passage of Terence, in which the poet represents it as the property of man to err. [Or
to Cicero, rather: Cujusvis hominis est errare, etc. Philipp. xii. 2.]